Can you please explain to me how giving huge tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans and increasing the deficit by $1.5 trillion over the next decade is a good thing? Do you guys own private jets and run hedge funds?
I honestly don’t understand how middle class people can be so for this tax plan. Help me understand your thinking on this.
Thanks for any replies.

Can you please explain to me how giving huge tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans and increasing the deficit by $1.5 trillion over the next decade is a good thing? Do you guys own private jets and run hedge funds?
I honestly don’t understand how middle class people can be so for this tax plan. Help me understand your thinking on this.
Thanks for any replies.

I work for a wealthy guy.

They could also consider, you know, cutting spending.

Do you invest? Just the NEWS about tax cuts made my IRA shoot up substantially the past few weeks. Yeah, I benefit.

Can you please explain to me how giving huge tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans and increasing the deficit by $1.5 trillion over the next decade is a good thing? Do you guys own private jets and run hedge funds?
I honestly don’t understand how middle class people can be so for this tax plan. Help me understand your thinking on this.
Thanks for any replies.

I invest a very healthy percentage into my Thrift Savings Plan (government employee/military version of a 401K) and I have been making bank on that for sure. Wall Street does love tax cuts and deregulation. Also, living in a red state I think I may pay less in federal taxes for the first couple of years.
Like I inferred above, I’m not going to argue in this thread. I genuinely want to understand the rationale.

Then please, Mike, if you will, let me know why cutting taxes on the richest of us is good policy. I can’t wrap my head around it and really want to understand the thought process.
You all seem excited about this legislation.

Why should you want yourself, or anyone else, to pay more taxes? We always hear about tax raising and lowering. Never do we hear about spending cuts.

I don't believe in the boogey man that is the white fat cat on Wall Street. Yet that's what is always offered up every time we talk about tax cuts. Why do we support these rich guys? My boss is double taxed. He's also my father. He is one of the "rich fat cats" if you look at Obama's definition of the wealthy. Those "making" above 250k. He pays corporate AND personal income on that. It's ****. What's left over is just plowed back into the company anyway. He's certainly not firing up a cigar with a Benjamin. Now, I'll admit, there's personal anger felt at the checkout line when you see the fat, sorry **** slobs paying for mountains of sugar drinks and food with a gov't card. So there's my answer. Why the hell do we have to pay for someone else who can work but won't?

I know, I know. Privilege, oppression, racism.... But there can be no denial that making it easier for people to eat without lifting a finger is enabling that behavior.

Social security is a joke. How many retirees am I paying for now? What poor return will I see on that money in the future? I can manage that money far better than the gov't. But it's not just the camel's nose that's under the tent, he's come all the way inside and **** on the fabric. Short story, tax cuts = automatic good thing, in my opinion. If we are so worried about the deficit, let's look at expenditures. Then I'll listen to that argument.

Then please, Mike, if you will, let me know why cutting taxes on the richest of us is good policy. I can’t wrap my head around it and really want to understand the thought process.
You all seem excited about this legislation.

I'm excited because I will pay less. I'll take every penny I can get.
As to the rich. I've never agreed that the rich should have to pay more. Why is one workers paycheck worth less because that worker has busted his **** to make it to the top of his or her field? Never understood that. I know folks in the music biz and it's mind boggling the taxes they pay. Then, to add insult to injury, they get treated (by some) like they are screwing over the blue collar worker.

I'm excited because I will pay less. I'll take every penny I can get.
As to the rich. I've never agreed that the rich should have to pay more. Why is one workers paycheck worth less because that worker has busted his **** to make it to the top of his or her field? Never understood that. I know folks in the music biz and it's mind boggling the taxes they pay. Then, to add insult to injury, they get treated (by some) like they are screwing over the blue collar worker.

Here's an idea. Every able bodied male that is on gov't assistance will be required to obtain successful employment. However, when said male is not out hunting for a job, he will, Monday through Friday, be required to show up to my farm and pull weeds, clear fence rows, or whatever else I need to get done.

If there is no work to be done, then they go to a building in the middle of town and sit there from 8 to 5. I don't get to sit on MY **** all day. Why should they?

Before social security, old people without families often starved and froze in the alleys. Literally. Charities rarely managed to prevent this. The issue is that many, if not most people, do not save enough in their working life to allow them to support themselves in old age or disability. Yeah, many were irresponsible. Some just unlucky. Since there is no reliable test to distinguish the deserving from the undeserving, I'm happy with a comprehensive system that ensures that the deserving are taken care of. Fie on the undeserving people taking my tax money, but that's the price I pay to not have to walk past beggars in the street.

I'm open to spending cuts but while some Rs talk big about cutting spending they always take defense off the table and never touch the third rail of going after entitlements, i.e., SS and Medicare. Never. Discretionary domestic spending, i.e., non-entitlements is bug dust comparatively speaking. What is the EPA's budget, somethinglike $5 billion? One Ford class super carrier is $13 billion and if you add in the air wing it carries (60 F18s and F35s at $60-100 million a piece) and the 5 or so Burke class AEGIS destroyers to escort the Ford carrier at $3 billion a piece you're talking $30 bilion give or take just to own a single carrier strike group, must less operate it. The navy wants to build a Ford carrier every other year to replace the 11 Nimitz carriers we have and the Rs in Congress want 12 carrier strike groups. Plus, we need to replace the 14 Ohio class SSBNs with 12 Columbia class boats at something like 10 billion each. I think we need a strong navy and this is all probably necessary, but we need to raise the revenue to pay for all of this. Since non discretionary non defense spending is off the table the simple fact is there is not huge savings to be had unless you go after SS and Medicare. Good luck with that.

Bottom line: we can tax and spend or we can borrow and spend. The tax bill represents the latter.

I'm open to spending cuts but while some Rs talk big about cutting spending they always take defense off the table and never touch the third rail of going after entitlements, i.e., SS and Medicare. Never. Discretionary domestic spending, i.e., non-entitlements is bug dust competitively speaking. What is the EPA's budget, somethinglike $5 billion? One Ford class super carrier is $13 billion and if you add in the air wing it carries (60 F18s and F35s at $60-100 million a piece) and the 5 or so Burke class AEGIS destroyers to escort the Ford carrier at $3 billion a piece you're talking $30 bilion give or take just to own a single carrier strike group, must less operate it. The navy wants to build a Ford carrier every other year to replace the 11 Nimitz carriers we have and the Rs in Congress want 12 carrier strike groups. Plus, we need to replace the 14 Ohio class SSBNs with 12 Columbia class boats at something like 10 billion each. I think we need a strong navy and this is all probably necessary, but we need to raise the revenue to pay for all of this. Since non discretionary non defense spending is off the table the simple fact is there is not huge savings to be had unless you go after SS and Medicare. Good luck with that.

Bottom line: we can tax and spend or we can borrow and spend. The tax bill represents the latter.

Can you please explain to me how giving huge tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans and increasing the deficit by $1.5 trillion over the next decade is a good thing? Do you guys own private jets and run hedge funds?
I honestly don’t understand how middle class people can be so for this tax plan. Help me understand your thinking on this.
Thanks for any replies.

1) I'm not a fan of the increased deficit. Not to play politics but I find it funny that the Dems are upset about increasing the deficit and the GOPers are all over it like stink on ****...really....**** is wrong with everyone?

2) I'm not sure how this only benefits the rich. From what I can tell and I very well could be wrong is that the vast majority of those paying the vast portion of the taxes (aka 20% of tax payers pay 80% of the taxes) will receive a cut. From what I can tell the vast majority of the 80% paying the remaining 20% will also receive a cut. Now people are upset that a large portion of people who already pay littlet in taxes (both absolute dollars and percentage aren't getting a cut....ummm that's just called math...yes that ought to get people nice and fired up

3) As someone in the lower upper class or upper middle class...I have no idea what defines that anymore I don't see how on a personal level you wouldn't like it...I will certainly have more money in my wallet

4) But I am still pissed about the deficit. I am willing see how this plays out in terms of the economic impact....but we need to stop spending like drunken sailors

Corporate

Fly Fisherman

COOKIE POLICYWe use cookies to improve your browsing experience and help us improve our websites. For more information, please click here. By continuing to use our website, you agree to our use of such cookies.

PRIVACY POLICYOur Privacy Policy has changed. For more information, please click here. By continuing to use our website, you agree to the changes.

TERMS OF USEOur Terms of Use have changed. For more information, please click here. By continuing to use our website, you agree to the changes.